Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Russ Allbery dijo [Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 05:02:01PM -0800]: > (...) > I think there are three options, and I'd love to get feedback on which of > those three options we should take. > > 1. Status quo: there is an undocumented editor virtual package, Policy >says that nothing has to provide or

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Hey there, Sorry, I was on offline vacation until now. :) El dt 26 de 12 de 2017 a les 15:24 +, en/na Holger Levsen va escriure: > On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 05:02:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > I think there are three options, and I'd love to get feedback on > > which of > > those three

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 05:02:01PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > I think there are three options, and I'd love to get feedback on which of > those three options we should take. > > 1. Status quo: there is an undocumented editor virtual package, Policy >says that nothing has to provide or

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Re: Russ Allbery 2017-12-26 <87wp1as3na@hope.eyrie.org> > 1. Status quo: there is an undocumented editor virtual package, Policy >says that nothing has to provide or depend on it, and some random >collection of editors provide it. I think this is a bad place to be, >so I would

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Re-adding Jordi to this thread as the maintainer of GNU nano. Christoph Berg writes: > I'm not vetoing any outcome - I'm just expressing my astonishment > here. To me, the situation looks like that the current implementation of > "editor" is like 80% ok, and because reaching

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-30 <87k21lj7id@hope.eyrie.org> > Paride Legovini writes: > > On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:09:34 +0200 Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > >> Nano is priority important which means it will be installed by default > >> and someone who

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Paride Legovini writes: > On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:09:34 +0200 Jeroen Dekkers wrote: >> Nano is priority important which means it will be installed by default >> and someone who explicitly uninstalls nano will probably also install >> another editor. I

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:09:34 +0200 Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 19:16:53 +0200, > Christoph Berg wrote: > > > > Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <87efs1lyc7@hope.eyrie.org> > > > Oh, thank you! For some reason, apt-cache rdepends didn't show any of > > > those

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 19:16:53 +0200, Christoph Berg wrote: > > Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <87efs1lyc7@hope.eyrie.org> > > Oh, thank you! For some reason, apt-cache rdepends didn't show any of > > those packages. All of them except dnsvi are Suggests, which basically > > doesn't accomplish

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Christoph Berg writes: > Thanks for the notice. I'm quite surprised that my dnsvi seems to be the > only package in Debian that requires a text editor. Given that our base > doesn't really include one, and getting dependencies Just Right is among > the things that Debian is

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Russ Allbery wrote: >> +++ b/policy/ch-customized-programs.rst >> @@ -93,19 +93,21 @@ page. > [...] >> -It is not required for a package to depend on ``editor`` and ``pager``, >> -nor is it required for a package to provide such virtual >> -packages.

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Hi, Russ Allbery wrote: > +++ b/policy/ch-customized-programs.rst > @@ -93,19 +93,21 @@ page. [...] > -It is not required for a package to depend on ``editor`` and ``pager``, > -nor is it required for a package to provide such virtual > -packages. [#]_ > +Packages may assume that

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Re: To Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <20170824171653.r24gyar5mikyj...@msg.df7cb.de> > $ grep-dctrl -F Provides editor -nsPackage > /var/lib/apt/lists/deb_debian_dists_sid_main_binary-amd64_Packages | xargs > deutex edbrowse emacs25 emacs25-lucid emacs25-nox fte-console > fte-terminal fte-xwindow jed

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <87efs1lyc7@hope.eyrie.org> > Oh, thank you! For some reason, apt-cache rdepends didn't show any of > those packages. All of them except dnsvi are Suggests, which basically > doesn't accomplish anything. > > Copying myon on this message as maintainer of dnsvi,

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Dropping Artem, whose email address no longer works. Brendan O'Dea writes: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:03:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> In previous discussions, no one seemed to feel that it was helpful as a >> virtual package. Virtual packages are only useful for

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:03:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >Would anyone on the Policy list or any of the maintainers bcc'd want to >make a case for keeping the virtual package "editor"? No strong objection to removing this virtual package. >In previous discussions, no one seemed to feel that

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Control: tags -1 patch (Adding the maintainers of the affected packages via Bcc.) Artem Leshchev writes: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > Virtual package name 'editor' was removed from Authoritative List of > Virtual Package Names in 1996 year, but it is used

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 08:57:33PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:16:08AM +0400, Artem Leshchev wrote: Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist Virtual package name 'editor' was removed from Authoritative List of Virtual Package Names in 1996 year, but it is

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 01:16:08AM +0400, Artem Leshchev wrote: Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist Virtual package name 'editor' was removed from Authoritative List of Virtual Package Names in 1996 year, but it is used at our days. Maybe we need to add it to section Old and

Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist Virtual package name 'editor' was removed from Authoritative List of Virtual Package Names in 1996 year, but it is used at our days. Maybe we need to add it to section Old and obsolete virtual package names, which is empty? If yes, we need to file a bug